COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION AND OTHER ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISMS IN CROSS-BORDER COMMERCIAL DISPUTES

Abstract

Cross-border commercial disputes have increased with globalization, presenting challenges including conflicting legal systems, jurisdictional uncertainty, high litigation costs, and lengthy court proceedings. Traditional court litigation is often slow and inefficient for resolving international disputes. As a result, international arbitration and other Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms have assumed a central role in international commercial practice. They offer flexible, faster, neutrality, and more cost-effective methods of resolving disputes outside national courts. While adopting doctrinal method of legal research, this paper provides a comparative examination of international arbitration alongside other ADR processes in cross-border commercial disputes. It analyses their legal foundations, procedural structures, and normative objectives, with particular attention to party autonomy, enforceability, confidentiality, finality, and institutional support. Beyond their advantages, the study critically evaluates persistent challenges affecting these mechanisms, including high costs, procedural delays, enforcement limitations, restricted review of arbitral awards, jurisdictional conflicts, and tensions between confidentiality and transparency. The paper further explores contemporary developments shaping the field, including reform debates surrounding Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), the integration of technology and online dispute resolution (ODR), and the growing emphasis on diversity and inclusion in arbitral appointments. Through structured comparison, the paper argues that while international arbitration remains central to cross-border dispute resolution, its effectiveness depends on addressing structural limitations and adapting to evolving global expectations. Effective dispute resolution in international commerce therefore requires not the dominance of a single mechanism, but a coherent and context-sensitive integration of arbitration and other ADR processes within the modern architecture of global commercial law. The paper concludes by recommending measures to enhance the efficiency, accessibility, and fairness of dispute resolution mechanisms in an increasingly interconnected global economy.